Hello forge developers and users! :-) As you probably know we are in the process of moving our wiki based web page ( https://docs.jboss.org/author/display/FORGE/Home ) to a site of its own. If you see this for the first time, you can find more details here: https://github.com/forge/website .

Once we are more confident about its completeness, we will publish it. Before that, though, we would like to hear your opinion about the domain name. Here are the options: * jboss.org/forge -> this can be easily got. However we cannot have all the services that we need (like hosting our plugin repository for example). We should stick to the ones offered by the jboss.org server

* forge.jboss.org -> we can use this domain name in all kinds of cloud solutions (like Openshift). There we will be in power to choose the web site technology

* forge.org -> unfortunately this is already taken. But it looks great for our tool to have this domain - easy to remember and straight to the point * jbossforge.org -> it's not occupied yet and is close to what we see on our logo

* forge.net / forge.nu / forge.<anything> -> use any free domain that starts with forge

* change the project name to something else, which has free <domain-name>.org

* any other great idea that you can think of... To share my opinion: jboss.org is great! However, if the only way to get it is by paying to its owner, then I am also fine with jbossforge.org . Cheers, Ivan _______________________________________________ forge-dev mailing list forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev

>> * jboss.org/forge -> this can be easily got. However we cannot have >> all the services that we need (like hosting our plugin repository for >> example). We should stick to the ones offered by the jboss.org server > > -1 if we have limitations What does hosting plugin repo require ? I thought the repo was just a static file that would be regenerated from time to time ?

From conversations with Lincoln, the repository would be more dynamic (e.g. web app) than static. I'll let Lincoln list the details. The other item we discussed was the URL's themselves as

Would a reverse proxy setup be sufficient ? i.e. jboss.org/forge/repo redirected to some openshift hosted setup ? I don't think jboss.org guys would reject that upfront if they get asked. Depends of course of what IT etc. says and how the setup works - i.e. I got such setup for jboss central feeds to feedburner and the only challenge been that they only allow proxy redirect to specific set of IP's but that shouldn't be a a big problem for this should it ? >> * forge.jboss.org -> we can use this domain name in all kinds of cloud >> solutions (like Openshift). There we will be in power to choose the >> web site technology > > +1 I got tools.jboss.org setup, but that just goes to jboss.org/tools and just because this was asked for long before they started using: issues.jboss.org, community.jboss.org, source.jboss.org etc. forge.jboss.org falls a bit outside of this so not sure how that fits, but worth asking jboss.org guys about. /max _______________________________________________ forge-dev mailing list forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev

The plugin repository is a place where authors can, online, without interacting with Git directly, add their plugin, a description, how to install/get started, and basic usage of the plugin. It's a webapp that runs on top of the repo git repository. It's searchable, and much like this: http://grails.org/plugins/ ~Lincoln On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 9:43 AM, Rodney Russ <rruss(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: ----- "Max Rydahl Andersen" <max.andersen(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > >> * jboss.org/forge -> this can be easily got. However we cannot > have > >> all the services that we need (like hosting our plugin repository > for > >> example). We should stick to the ones offered by the jboss.org > server > > > > -1 if we have limitations > > What does hosting plugin repo require ? > > I thought the repo was just a static file that would be regenerated > from time to time ? >From conversations with Lincoln, the repository would be more dynamic (e.g. web app) than static. I'll let Lincoln list the details. The other item we discussed was the URL's themselves as forge.jboss.org/plugins would be preferred over jboss.org/forge/plugins but that specifically is an aesthetic issue more than a technical one > > Would a reverse proxy setup be sufficient ? > > i.e. jboss.org/forge/repo redirected to some openshift hosted setup ? > > I don't think jboss.org guys would reject that upfront if they get > asked. > > Depends of course of what IT etc. says and how the setup works - i.e. > I got such setup for jboss central feeds to feedburner and the only > challenge > been that they only allow proxy redirect to specific set of IP's but > that shouldn't > be a a big problem for this should it ? > > >> * forge.jboss.org -> we can use this domain name in all kinds of > cloud > >> solutions (like Openshift). There we will be in power to choose > the > >> web site technology > > > > +1 > > I got tools.jboss.org setup, but that just goes to jboss.org/tools and > just because > this was asked for long before they started using: issues.jboss.org, > community.jboss.org, source.jboss.org etc. > > forge.jboss.org falls a bit outside of this so not sure how that fits, > but worth asking jboss.org guys about. > > /max > > > _______________________________________________ > forge-dev mailing list > forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev _______________________________________________ forge-dev mailing list forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev -- Lincoln Baxter, III http://ocpsoft.org "Simpler is better." _______________________________________________ forge-dev mailing list forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev

On the topic of the domain name, I think forge.jboss.org is the very best for several reasons: 1) It's matches the name (JBoss Forge) we communicate well 2) It's still clear that it's a JBoss project 3) We could potentially migrate it to any other hosting solution if required for technical reasons 4) It communicates better then jboss.org/forge I don't think we should adopt any extra domain names, this is just confusing. Paul On Apr 26, 2012, at 16:53 , Lincoln Baxter, III wrote: > The plugin repository is a place where authors can, online, without interacting with Git directly, add their plugin, a description, how to install/get started, and basic usage of the plugin. It's a webapp that runs on top of the repo git repository. It's searchable, and much like this: http://grails.org/plugins/ > > ~Lincoln > > On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 9:43 AM, Rodney Russ <rruss(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > > ----- "Max Rydahl Andersen" <max.andersen(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > > > >> * jboss.org/forge -> this can be easily got. However we cannot > > have > > >> all the services that we need (like hosting our plugin repository > > for > > >> example). We should stick to the ones offered by the jboss.org > > server > > > > > > -1 if we have limitations > > > > What does hosting plugin repo require ? > > > > I thought the repo was just a static file that would be regenerated > > from time to time ? > > >From conversations with Lincoln, the repository would be more dynamic (e.g. web app) than static. I'll let Lincoln list the details. The other item we discussed was the URL's themselves as > > forge.jboss.org/plugins would be preferred over > jboss.org/forge/plugins > > but that specifically is an aesthetic issue more than a technical one > > > > > Would a reverse proxy setup be sufficient ? > > > > i.e. jboss.org/forge/repo redirected to some openshift hosted setup ? > > > > I don't think jboss.org guys would reject that upfront if they get > > asked. > > > > Depends of course of what IT etc. says and how the setup works - i.e. > > I got such setup for jboss central feeds to feedburner and the only > > challenge > > been that they only allow proxy redirect to specific set of IP's but > > that shouldn't > > be a a big problem for this should it ? > > > > >> * forge.jboss.org -> we can use this domain name in all kinds of > > cloud > > >> solutions (like Openshift). There we will be in power to choose > > the > > >> web site technology > > > > > > +1 > > > > I got tools.jboss.org setup, but that just goes to jboss.org/tools and > > just because > > this was asked for long before they started using: issues.jboss.org, > > community.jboss.org, source.jboss.org etc. > > > > forge.jboss.org falls a bit outside of this so not sure how that fits, > > but worth asking jboss.org guys about. > > > > /max > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > forge-dev mailing list > > forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev > _______________________________________________ > forge-dev mailing list > forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev > > > > -- > Lincoln Baxter, III > http://ocpsoft.org > "Simpler is better." > _______________________________________________ > forge-dev mailing list > forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev _______________________________________________ forge-dev mailing list forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev

Ok. I am currently discussing with Mark, so I need to finish that first. On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 3:33 PM, Max Rydahl Andersen < max.andersen(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > so Lincoln, you need to request that from help(a)jboss.org or TAG since > its a different layout than anything else. > > I'll support it but lets get the process started then. > > /max > > On Apr 26, 2012, at 20:30 , Paul Bakker wrote: > > > On the topic of the domain name, I think forge.jboss.org is the very > best for several reasons: > > 1) It's matches the name (JBoss Forge) we communicate well > > 2) It's still clear that it's a JBoss project > > 3) We could potentially migrate it to any other hosting solution if > required for technical reasons > > 4) It communicates better then jboss.org/forge > > > > I don't think we should adopt any extra domain names, this is just > confusing. > > > > Paul > > > > On Apr 26, 2012, at 16:53 , Lincoln Baxter, III wrote: > > > >> The plugin repository is a place where authors can, online, without > interacting with Git directly, add their plugin, a description, how to > install/get started, and basic usage of the plugin. It's a webapp that runs > on top of the repo git repository. It's searchable, and much like this: > http://grails.org/plugins/ > >> > >> ~Lincoln > >> > >> On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 9:43 AM, Rodney Russ <rruss(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > >> > >> ----- "Max Rydahl Andersen" <max.andersen(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > >> > >> > >> * jboss.org/forge -> this can be easily got. However we cannot > >> > have > >> > >> all the services that we need (like hosting our plugin repository > >> > for > >> > >> example). We should stick to the ones offered by the jboss.org > >> > server > >> > > > >> > > -1 if we have limitations > >> > > >> > What does hosting plugin repo require ? > >> > > >> > I thought the repo was just a static file that would be regenerated > >> > from time to time ? > >> > >> >From conversations with Lincoln, the repository would be more dynamic > (e.g. web app) than static. I'll let Lincoln list the details. The other > item we discussed was the URL's themselves as > >> > >> forge.jboss.org/plugins would be preferred over > >> jboss.org/forge/plugins > >> > >> but that specifically is an aesthetic issue more than a technical one > >> > >> > > >> > Would a reverse proxy setup be sufficient ? > >> > > >> > i.e. jboss.org/forge/repo redirected to some openshift hosted setup > ? > >> > > >> > I don't think jboss.org guys would reject that upfront if they get > >> > asked. > >> > > >> > Depends of course of what IT etc. says and how the setup works - i.e. > >> > I got such setup for jboss central feeds to feedburner and the only > >> > challenge > >> > been that they only allow proxy redirect to specific set of IP's but > >> > that shouldn't > >> > be a a big problem for this should it ? > >> > > >> > >> * forge.jboss.org -> we can use this domain name in all kinds of > >> > cloud > >> > >> solutions (like Openshift). There we will be in power to choose > >> > the > >> > >> web site technology > >> > > > >> > > +1 > >> > > >> > I got tools.jboss.org setup, but that just goes to jboss.org/toolsand > >> > just because > >> > this was asked for long before they started using: issues.jboss.org, > >> > community.jboss.org, source.jboss.org etc. > >> > > >> > forge.jboss.org falls a bit outside of this so not sure how that > fits, > >> > but worth asking jboss.org guys about. > >> > > >> > /max > >> > > >> > > >> > _______________________________________________ > >> > forge-dev mailing list > >> > forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > >> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev > >> _______________________________________________ > >> forge-dev mailing list > >> forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Lincoln Baxter, III > >> http://ocpsoft.org > >> "Simpler is better." > >> _______________________________________________ > >> forge-dev mailing list > >> forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev > > > > _______________________________________________ > > forge-dev mailing list > > forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev > > > _______________________________________________ > forge-dev mailing list > forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev > -- Lincoln Baxter, III http://ocpsoft.org "Simpler is better."